How the Other Half Lives

You thought the Eagles' NFC Championship win meant that snowballs were being tossed in hell? Try this one on for size: They're oozing happiness at WIP.

With the Super Bowl more than a week away, the local media are jumping on every ridiculous angle and nonstory they can get their hands on. The 11 o'clock news breathlessly reports that Terrell Owens may or may not be ready to play in Jacksonville, which is exactly what we knew the day he went down. Today's Inquirer includes a story in the Magazine section on a reporter's attempt to find and purchase an Eagles hat in New England. No, really.

Amid such attention, the Phillies' annual media caravan chugs along in irrelevant anonymity. No wonder Jim Thome was so enraptured by the scene at Lincoln Financial Field last Sunday. As I've pointed out recently (he said shamelessly), the hometown nine need only look across the parking lot for an example of how to spend wisely and win consistently. Writing in today's Daily News, Bill Conlin tells Ed Wade that about the only consolation he can take is that Eagles salary cap guru Joe Banner was once as despised as he is. Once the Birds are done, the town's attention will turn to the Phillies, whose fan base, Conlin writes, seems already to have made up its mind:

Thanks to the negative energy that has trickled out of the front office all winter like a car battery on a 20-degree morning with the parking lights left on, there is more than the deep dislike of this organization's modus operandi that I sense from thousands of fans. There is a fan perception that not only has Wade & Co. done nothing more than take three steps forward and four back, but that it will be a terrible ballclub this season.

Conlin's not ready to write off the season yet, and neither am I, but no one can deny that the Mets, Braves, and Marlins all took bold stabs at improvement this off-season while Wade peered at his pair of 7s and decided not to take any cards. So as much as I'm ready for spring training to start, I think I'll savor the next week-and-a-half of football frenzy. It might be the only playoff action we get this year.

Comments

[Tom G]

Very trendy poker reference...nice.

[gr]

pair of sevens? we WISH!

[Tom]

Hey, Thome and Abreu aren't just a pair of 3s...

[George S]

Although probably as disappointed as anyone about the lack of bold action by Wade this offseason, I have to step back and try to look at the Phillies' chances this year from a different point of view.
Last year the Phillies won 86 games. They had injuries to key people like Wagner, Wolf, Burrell, Padilla, Millwood and nagging injuries to others like Thome and Bell. So they won 86 games despite this and without career years from anyone. CF was a mess all year as well. And the perceived problems with the manager were well-documented.
From this I would think that with any luck at all in the health department, the Phillies could win 90 games this season.
I do not believe the Braves can win 96 games again this season, partly because they have no outfield, and partly because the division is tougher top-to-bottom than it was last year.
The Mets are improved but still have several big holes. The Marlins are improved but have no bullpen. So I would consider the East as up for grabs. If the Phillies can find lightning in a bottle from any of their key people, they will be in the thick of it.
I don't think the Phillies have that bad a team. They have a lot of question marks, but not a lot of holes.
That all being said, I just don't think Wade was bold or imaginative enough this winter when there were certainly some opportunites out there.
George S

[gr]

george -- if the division improved enough that the braves can't win 96, why should the phils be able to win 90? its not that the phils have a bad team -- its that they have the same team: a bunch of Ks in the middle of the line-up, a staff that hasn't ever pitched well as a whole and no real coheasiveness. who's their leader?

[Tom G]

George S makes some really really good points...While Steady Eddie could have done better, there are a number of reasons to be optimistic.

[John Salmon]

The Braves won't win 96 games because they don't have JD Drew any more. It's a weak division, improvements to the Mets and Marlins notwithstanding, and there's no reason a healthier Phils roster (just based on luck, health should be less of an issue in '05) shouldn't win 90 games and the division. Their leader (as if it mattered) is Thome.

[John Salmon]

BTW I don't really see the Eagles as an example for the Phillies-the way football is structured (the number of games, how the schedules are re-balanced every year, etc.), how many games you win is easily 50% luck. Not so in baseball, with a 162 game schedule.

[gr]

i'm sorry, but i'm a big believer in intangibles and i don't think this team has them. i also think one can't argue that a team will win because there's no reason they shouldn't -- there's always a reason they shouldn't. if you can't argue why they will win -- brett myers will improve becasue A, the bullpen will hold up because B, offense will be consistent becasue C -- then, there is no argument in favor, just one that's not against.

thome is a good player but does he strike you as a "leader" the way mcnabb or brian dawkins are or the way dutch was on the 93 team? i don't see that at all. believe me, i want the team to win, but i just don't see them winning more games than in 04. i am ready to back that bet up with a schmidter/tony luke'
s on the line.

[gr]

how did i spell 'because' wrong 3 times in a row? tom, is your blog playing tricks?

Hi, all--

If the blog is causing misspellings, it's a mistery too mee.

I agree that one must be careful about comparing apples to oranges, though I disagree that a football team's success if 50 percent due to luck. My point remains that the Eagles seem to get it, and the Phillies don't. One has a clue on running a first-class, consistently good team, and one doesn't.

When do pitchers and catchers report?

[John Salmon]

gr-Leadership is 40 HR's and 120 RBI's. I wouldn't say intangibles are meaningless because they aren't quantifiable-that's the extreme stathead view. But it strikes me that a bad atmosphere, which I guess is partially the product of leadership or the lack of it (such as we saw throughout the Bowa era) hurts more than a good atmosphere helps, no matter how many leaders you've got. The removal of Bowa may be worth 5 wins just by itself!

[gr]

john- that's all i'm saying. leadership is largely about creating the right atmosphere. sure bowa had something to do with it sucking, uut didn't the 93 team hate fregosi as well? my read is the vets stepped up and took over. i guess this year, we'll find out if whoever the clubhouse leaders are can take the reigns under manuel. but if, say, david bell goes out and hits .300-40-120, that doesn't automatically make him a bonafide leader, it makes him a big contributor.

ps. tom, i was kidding about the mispellings. i own them.